The railroad industry employs a variety of auto-rack railroad cars for transporting newly-manufactured vehicles such as automobiles, vans and trucks. Auto-rack railroad cars, known in the railroad industry as auto-rack cars, often travel thousands of miles through varying terrain. One typical type of auto-rack car is compartmented, having two or three floors or decks, two sidewalls, a pair of doors at each end, and a roof. Newly manufactured vehicles are loaded into and unloaded from an auto-rack car for transport by a person (sometimes called a “loader”) who drives the vehicles into or out of the auto-rack car.
One problem with auto-rack cars is the potential for damage to newly manufactured vehicles which can occur in the auto-rack car due to the unwanted movement of one or more of the transported vehicles not adequately secured in the auto-rack car. Various restraint or anchoring systems have been developed for securing the vehicles transported in auto-rack cars to prevent movement or shifting of those vehicles during transportation. The loader typically operates these vehicle restraint or anchoring systems. One known type of system employs a “tie down” restraint using chains connected to steel runners in the support surface of the auto-rack car. A ratchet tool is usually required to secure these chains taut. Certain types of these known systems utilize winch mechanisms and harnesses which must be fitted over the vehicle tires to restrain movement of the vehicle.
To solve the disadvantages of such mechanisms, a vehicle restraint system for restraining vehicles transported on auto-rack cars was developed. This vehicle restraint system is disclosed in detail in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,312,213 and 5,302,063. This vehicle restraint system includes a plurality of restraints each detachably secured to a grating provided on a support surface of the auto-rack car. This system utilizes four restraints, one associated with each of the four wheels of a vehicle being transported.
As illustrated in FIGS. 2 and 3, the restraint 32 of this known system includes an angled face-plate 34 for alignment with, and restraining movement of, a tire 40 of an associated wheel 42 of the vehicle 44 positioned on the grating 38. The angled face-plate 34 is vertically adjustable to a lower position (shown in FIGS. 2 and 3), an intermediate position (not shown), and an upper position (shown in phantom in FIG. 2) to provide for different tire sizes. The angled face-plate 34 is attached to a load-transmitting member 36 which is adapted to transfer the load applied to the face-plate 34 to the grating 38. The restraint 32 includes a moveable paddle-shaped restraining member 39 which contacts the inside surface of the tire to prevent lateral shifting of the tire and thus of the vehicle. The paddle shaped restraining member 39 is connected to the face-plate 34 such that when the face-plate is vertically adjusted, the paddle shaped restraining member is vertically adjusted. For several years, this vehicle restraint system has been widely employed in auto-rack cars to secure vehicles.
Various problems have developed with this vehicle restraint system in relation to new types or designs of vehicles such as “cross-over” vehicles and other vehicles with different body and particularly different fender, molding or trim profiles. For example, cross-over vehicles generally include a truck or SUV-type body mounted on an automobile-type frame. These cross-over vehicles have a higher center of gravity, a much lower curb weight than conventional automobiles and SUV's, and include relatively low fenders, moldings, trim and bumpers (compared to certain trucks, vans and SUVs). Other new vehicles also have low fenders, moldings, trim and bumpers. When such vehicles are loaded in an auto-rack railroad car on the grating of the vehicle restraint system described above, it has been found that these known vehicle restraints are not adequately holding the vehicles in place or adequately preventing the movement of the vehicles to a minimum desired level of movement. This lack of restraint occurs, at least in part, because the adjustable member or face-plate 34 of such above described restraints cannot be mounted or positioned with the face-plate in the intermediate or upper positions because it will or may interfere with or contact the low bumper, fender, trim or molding of the vehicle as illustrated in phantom in FIG. 2. Vehicle manufacturers want to avoid such contact or potential contact during the transportation of the vehicles to avoid damage to the vehicles.
More specifically, it should be appreciated that vehicle manufacturers provide extremely particular instructions which warn against any contact or engagement between anything in the auto-rack railroad cars and the new vehicles because the vehicle manufacturers desire to deliver the newly manufactured vehicles to dealers and their customers in “perfect” condition. Any damage, such as scratches or dents to the fenders, bumpers, moldings, trim or other parts of the vehicle, could prevent or inhibit a customer from purchasing or taking delivery of the vehicle, and generally need to be fixed prior to sale of the vehicle. Accordingly, vehicle manufacturers prefer that the adjustable face-plate 34 of the restraint of the above system not contact and not come close to being in contact with the fenders, bumpers, trim or moldings of the newly manufactured vehicles being transported. The adjustable face-plate 34 of the above described restraint must accordingly be placed in the lowest or, at best, the intermediate position when securing many presently manufactured vehicles in the auto-rack cars. This causes the face-plate to engage the tire at a lower point on the tire, and accordingly, the vehicle is more likely to be able to jump over or hop the restraint (as illustrated in FIG. 3) if the vehicle is subjected to sufficient forces.
Even when the face-plate is in the highest position, other problems with holding the tire in place often occur, especially where the vehicles do not have locking steering columns. The cause for these problems is that the paddle-shaped restraining member 39 contacts the side of the tire 40 at too high of a position which allows the tire to turn and to be disengaged from the face-plate of the restraint 32 as generally illustrated in FIG. 3A. In certain instances, the vehicle literally “walks out” of this restraint 32 as illustrated in FIG. 3A. This illustration is generally of a photograph taken inside an auto-rack railroad car employing the above described vehicle restraint system.
It should be appreciated that each tire of vehicle has a safe zone of operation (in front and in back of the tire) for a vehicle restraint system. Each safe zone is a somewhat triangular area in front of or in back of the tire. Each safe zone defines the space in which a vehicle restraint system can operate without the potential for contacting the fenders, trim, moldings or bumpers of the vehicle. For example, safe zones 41a and 41b for a tire 40 of an automobile are generally illustrated in FIG. 3B. The above described vehicle restraint system functions outside of those safe zones for many vehicles, as generally illustrated in FIG. 2A which shows (in phantom) that when the angled face-plate 34 is in the preferred uppermost position, it is outside the safe zone 41a. Therefore, as mentioned above, the angled face-plate of the restraint 32 often needs to be placed in the lowest or intermediate position to stay within the respective safe zone and prevent damage or potential damage to the fender, trim, molding and bumper of the vehicle.
Another problem with this restraint is that for certain vehicles, the manufacturers can not install the air dams on the vehicles at the factory because the restraint would or could damage the air dams. Thus, for such vehicles, the manufacturer must ship the air dams to the dealerships for installation.
A related problem which can also cause a vehicle to be more likely to jump over or hop this restraint is that the restraint is sometimes not placed as close to the tire as potentially possible as illustrated in FIG. 2. One reason for this is that the loaders are in a hurry when they load the vehicles into the auto-rack railroad cars. When the loaders are in a hurry, they tend to place the restraint in a position close to the tire without substantially maneuvering the restraint to the closest possible position to the tire. This positioning can sometimes leave a substantial gap between the restraint and the tire. This gap coupled with a low face-plate position can allow the vehicle to build up speed causing the vehicle to hop or jump the restraint.
A similar problem arises because the restraint may need to be positioned or spaced at a distance from the tire because the tire is at a position on the grating or relative to the grating that does not allow the restraint to be placed in engagement with the tire. The restraint in certain instances is placed up to a distance of three-quarters of an inch away from the due to the position of the grating members or rungs relative to the tire and the three sets of locking members of this restraint. Again, in such situations, a gap is created allowing the vehicle to more easily hop or jump the restraint. This is also illustrated in FIG. 2 where the size of the gap between the tire and the face-plate is approximately half the distance between the rungs of the grating. This gap problem is compounded because certain vehicle manufacturers require that certain vehicles be transported with the transmission in neutral to prevent damage to the vehicle (such as damage to the transmission of the vehicle). In neutral, the transmission does not stop the vehicles from moving.
It should also be appreciated that the vehicles may jump or hop these restraints at a variety of different times such as during movement of the train including sudden stoppage of the auto-rack car or severe deceleration of the auto-rack car. Such instances can include sudden stopping for emergencies alone or in combination with slack action. The amount of force on the vehicles being transported relative to the auto-rack car can cause the vehicles to hop or jump over the restraint, especially if the tire is engaged by the face-plate at a relatively low point, if the restraint is spaced from the tire or if the face-plate is at a low position and spaced from the tire.
More importantly, during switching in a railroad yard, the auto-rack cars are coupled and decoupled with other railroad cars in different freight trains on a regular basis. During the coupling action, severe jolts of up to 8 to 10 miles per hour can be incurred by the auto-rack car even though regulations (and signs in the railroad yards and on the railroad cars) limit the speed to no more than 4 miles per hour. These jolts can cause extreme force on the vehicles relative to the railroad cars and, thus, cause the vehicles to jump or hop these restraints especially if the tire is engaged by the angled face-plate at a relatively low point and/or if the restraint is spaced from the tire. When a vehicle hops or jumps a restraint, the vehicle may engage another vehicle in the auto-rack car or one or more end doors of the auto-rack car. There have been significant recorded instances of this type of damage to vehicles in auto-rack cars in railroad yards in recent years. As indicated above, such damage to the vehicles necessitates the replacement of the damaged part or parts and potentially other parts of the vehicle. This damage is extremely expensive for vehicle manufacturers which charge the railroads for such damage.
This problem is compounded for vehicle manufacturers when the vehicle damaged is a specially ordered vehicle (instead of a stock vehicle) for a specific customer. The customer can wait one, two, three or more months for a specially ordered vehicle. If the specially ordered vehicle is damaged in transit, the customer may need to wait for another specially ordered vehicle to be manufactured. This can harm the dealer's and manufacturer's businesses. The restraints are also often damaged when the vehicles jump the restraint or run into the restraints with sufficient forces. The railroads have to replace these damaged restraints or have these damaged restraints reconstructed. This causes additional expenses to be incurred by the railroads.
It should thus be recognized that while the vehicle restraint system described above, which has been widely commercially implemented, secures many vehicles being transported in auto-rack cars, in many instances this vehicle restraint system does not adequately protect the vehicles or prevent the movement of the vehicles and thus prevent damage to the vehicles or the restraints themselves. The automobile industry and the railroad industry have sought improvements of this vehicle restraint system.
Various improvements have been proposed. For example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,926,480, 7,004,696, 7,128,508, and 7,150,592 disclose supplemental restraints which are configured to work with these restraints. In another example, U.S. Pat. No. 6,835,034 discloses a second restraint configured to work in conjunction with the above described restraints. One concern with such additional devices is that the loaders of the vehicles on the auto-rack cars need to position (when loading) and remove (when unloading) both the restraints and these additional devices. This takes additional time and effort during the loading and unloading process. Additionally, these multiple devices add more cost and complications. In another example, U.S. Patent No. 6,851,523 discloses an alternatively configured restraint. This restraint has not been commercialized.
Accordingly, there is a continuing need for an improved vehicle wheel restraint which is easy to install and remove, is attachable to the grating existing in the auto-rack cars, and which holds the vehicles more securely.